Sneed v. Wheeler Correctional Facility et al
Filing
22
ORDER denying 21 Motion to proceed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 5/6/15. (cmr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION
JAMES SNEED,
Plaintiff,
v.
WHEELER CORRECTIONAL
FACILITY, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
_________
CV 314-085
ORDER
_________
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff’s “motion to proceed” in which he requests information
on where to send his interrogatories and information on the rules of the Court, an almost identical
motion to one previously denied by the Court. (Doc. no. 21.) As Defendants in this case have yet to
be served, any discovery such as interrogatories by Plaintiff is improper at this time, as explained in
the Court’s prior Order. See Loc. R. 26.1. In addition, the Court has already given Plaintiff some
instructions on how to proceed with his case but cannot “serve as de facto counsel for a party. . . .”
In re Unsolicited Letters to Federal Judges, 120 F. Supp. 2d 1073, 1074 (S.D. Ga. 2000) (citation
omitted). Thus, Plaintiff’s request for the Court to advise him on the rules for this District is
improper. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s “motion to proceed.” (Doc. no. 21.)
SO ORDERED this 6th day of May, 2015, at Augusta, Georgia.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?